Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 23
  1. #1 Aussies called the F-18 a piece of shit. 
    gator
    Guest
    http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/conte...hornets_lo.asx

    The Aussies are mad as heck their politician stuck them with the American F-18 SuperHornet and they're saying the American plane can't hold it's own against Russian/Chinese threats they face.

    This is what happens when a country goes Left Wing. They start bitching about everything.

    The F-18 SuperHornet is fine for the Amrican military but the Aussies are bitching about it.

    Maybe they should buy planes from the Russians next time.

    After all they will be saving defense dollars by withdrawing combat troops from Iraq so maybe they can get the Rusians to sell them the top of line fighters.

    Or maybe the ingrates can just develop their own fighters and stop bitching about ours.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #2  
    An Adversary of Linda #'s
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    22,891
    Quote Originally Posted by gator View Post
    http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/conte...hornets_lo.asx

    The Aussies are mad as heck their politician stuck them with the American F-18 SuperHornet and they're saying the American plane can't hold it's own against Russian/Chinese threats they face.

    This is what happens when a country goes Left Wing. They start bitching about everything.

    The F-18 SuperHornet is fine for the Amrican military but the Aussies are bitching about it.

    Maybe they should buy planes from the Russians next time.

    After all they will be saving defense dollars by withdrawing combat troops from Iraq so maybe they can get the Rusians to sell them the top of line fighters.

    Or maybe the ingrates can just develop their own fighters and stop bitching about ours.
    The US Navy had F-14s as the primary fighter, A-6s as the primary attack plane, and F-18s as the tweener. That was great.Each had it's place, then the bean counters came and screwed up everything as they always do !


    Australia wants the F-22s but the problem at this time is the US refusal to sell the plane, and its $200 million price tag.

    They also would like the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter to replace their F-111's over time. The 100-plane deal will cost at least $5 billion and will be the F-35A conventional takeoff Air Force version.

    So we sold them the F-18's and now they cry because its a lower performance aircraft then the F-22 or the F-35 but still an excellent compromise. They should keep and update their F-111's !

    Access to the F-35’s software/firmware source code remains a live issue for the Australians , British, and others. That access is necessary for countries that want to upgrade the aircraft's computers, and/or integrate new weapons, communications, or electronic warfare systems.

    Every country that tries to purchase Either the F-22 or the F-35 wants access to the internal micro/nano code of the flight/navigation/fire control computers .The internals of
    computer code of both aircraft are considered to be 'state of the art' and secret.They would like the code, they say, to integrate their own missiles to the weapons bay configuration.We will provide a GUI to take care of the problem but they want the actual code,so tough craps on them
    !
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #3  
    Sonnabend
    Guest
    The Aussies are mad as heck their politician stuck them with the American F-18 SuperHornet and they're saying the American plane can't hold it's own against Russian/Chinese threats they face.

    This is what happens when a country goes Left Wing. They start bitching about everything.

    The F-18 SuperHornet is fine for the American military but the Aussies are bitching about it.
    Our military needs are different to yours, and what we need and want is an all weather, long range interceptor with the capacity for onsite bombing and other strike operations..

    The FA 18 has been a mainstay of ours for years, our military needs have changed and our focus has changed, so we need a better weapon for our aerial defences.

    We need an aircraft that can go toe to toe with aerial assets as well as ground strike and support operations...we have a huge amount of ground to cover and the Super Hornet, while a good aircraft, does not and will not need our unique requirements.

    Take a look at a map, sometime, take a good hard look and tell me how you can parse the defence of the CONUS and its needs to that of a Pacific continent that is surrounded by ocean,. parallelled by at least three predominantly Muslim nations, not to mention the hundreds of thousands of miles of coastline that has to be monitored and defended.

    We didnt buy your Los Angeles subs either...they dont suit our needs as we do not have to contend with the requirements of a hunter killer asset to protect boomers...our major issue is coastal defence and surveillance, air interception and force projection from the major cities.

    We have to think of strategic layers in depth, our military budget is a scant fraction of yours, and we must think in terms of long range capability and long term asset management.

    And this has nothing to do with a "left wing government" and EVERYTHING to do with listening to our generals who know a million times more about what our nation needs in terms of defence than you ever will.

    THEY are the ones who are making these decisions.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #4  
    Sonnabend
    Guest
    Here, see for yourself



    Those islands are the Philippines, NZ, Malaysia, Indonesia..all within a few hours of our coastline....we have over the horizon radar but what is needed for the future will be an all aspects high speed interceptor, capable of ACM or ground strike support..we need an aircraft with long range capability..we looked at the F14, but the needs and assets for support for the Phoenix wouldn't cut it..the Tomcat would have been the perfect aircraft, logistics wouldnt work.

    We have used the FA-18 for at least fifteen years or more already....with changing strategies, and new technology, means we have to rethink both strategic and logistics.

    You CANNOT apply AMERICAN solutions to a Pacific problem, because the needs are not the same, you do not live here, and you know jack shit about what our defensive needs are.

    Take a long look at that map, and tell me how we are supposed to apply the defensive parameters of the CONUS as opposed to our SPECIFIC defensive and offensive capabilities.

    We have no carriers....none. The last one we had was mothballed and then sold for scrap twenty years ago. Our defensive and offensive responders and squadrons are all land based. Even if we got the SH we'd still need FASTpack conformal cells or other assets for long range operations...other aircraft are better suited. We live with the tyranny of distance, and even if we yell for help, it will be a while coming.

    You lot want us to stand on our own...fine , then LISTEN when we tell you that the weapons you suggest will not suit the battlefields we must fight in.

    They should keep and update their F-111's !
    Meg...you're thinking US budget and strategies. Newer aircraft are in the long term a better investment than trying to keep an ageing airframe on the line.
    Last edited by Sonnabend; 06-30-2008 at 08:11 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #5  
    Vepr
    Guest
    While I do not begrudge the Australians wanting a better aircraft than the F-18 it is unrealistic for them to request the F-22 at this time. Also I thought the F-35 was not ready yet?

    Couldn't something be worked out with the F-15's? If I am not mistaken the F-15 is faster and can fly higher and I believe it also has a better range.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #6  
    Senior Member LogansPapa's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Surf City, USA
    Posts
    3,782
    They could always build their own. Oh wait, that’s crop dusters. My bad.:p

    http://www.ctie.monash.edu.au/hargra...xtai0509_a.jpg
    Last edited by LogansPapa; 06-30-2008 at 10:42 AM.
    At Coretta Scott King's funeral in early 2006, Ethel Kennedy, the widow of Robert Kennedy, leaned over to him and whispered, "The torch is being passed to you." "A chill went up my spine," Obama told an aide. (Newsweek)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #7  
    The big Cheese
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    3,273
    Quote Originally Posted by LogansPapa View Post
    They could always build their own. Oh wait, that’s crop dusters. My bad.:p

    http://www.ctie.monash.edu.au/hargra...xtai0509_a.jpg
    hahahahahahahaa
    One does not greet death when he knocks at your door.

    Nay you repeatedly punch him in the throat as he slowly drags you away.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #8  
    An Adversary of Linda #'s
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    22,891
    I understand the requirement Sonna but the aircraft you desire isn't a cost effective solution for Australia. If Indonesia is flying high performance soviet aircraft you need to keep on a par.I've read where Australia is using F-18 inflight refueling from KC-135 .That will give you the range you need !


    "Indonesia buys Su-27's/30's: \

    I read a bit of bad news for all of us Aussies today. Indonesia is to take purchase of 2 SU-27's and 2 SU-30's, the first of a possible 24 of each type to be bought. Apparently this puts our upgraded F/A-18 force 4th in quality, behind Singapore and Malaysia(fortunately both allies), and Indonesia, in our immediate region. The Hornet's are also suffering centre barrel fatigue, which means that training hours are being limited to preserve the airframes. To make it worse, the Indonesians are looking at buying S-300's and an intergrated air-defence system, which seriously degrades the deterrant posed by our F-111's and their AGM-142's.

    While the current Indonesian government is relitively friendly, their are lots of Generals who are pissed off about our involvement in the liberation of East Timor. If their were a coup, it could spell trouble for us. I don't see that our government has any choice but to upgrade our airforce, to get us through the next 10 years before the JSF can be expected to arrive. Possible options are,

    -Leasing/buying new fighters until the JSF arrives. The late model F-16's would solve the fatigue problems of the F-18's, but would not give a real advantage over the SU-27.

    -An F-18E/EF-18G combo would be formidable, with the EW aircraft giving us a real advantage, though I don't like the idea of the "E's" getting caught without the "G's". This plan would however have training/maintainance advantages, as we already use F-18's.

    -A "silver bullet" force of F-22's has been suggested as part of the JSF buy, to give us a clear air to air advantage over any adversary. The government has rejected this, but mabye the idea or a variation of it needs to be introduced to get us through the next few years. While the F-22 may be to expensive/not available to Australia, a squadron of Typhoon's, to replace the oldest F-18's, may give us the edge we need. The F-18's could then be kept in reserve and rotated through the remaining squadrons, to extend the life of the force and give the pilots the hours they need. This would also give us an independent ability to provide dissimilar air combat training, though it would introduce another completely different logistics train.

    -ALCM's like the Joint Standoff Weapon for the F-111's, outranging the S-300s would provide us with the deterrant we need. They would also mean the F-111's could continue to adopt the less demanding high-level approach.

    -Long-range missile defences(ie, Patriots), for our northern facilites and for Darwin has also been suggested.

    http://www.strategypage.com/militaryforums/7-171.aspx
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #9  
    gator
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonnabend View Post
    And this has nothing to do with a "left wing government" and EVERYTHING to do with listening to our generals who know a million times more about what our nation needs in terms of defence than you ever will.

    THEY are the ones who are making these decisions.
    So none of your generals signed off on the orginal purchase? They just bitch about it afterwards?

    It looks like your government and military should have done it's homework a little bit better ahead of time.

    If you got an expensive weapon system that you really didn't need then it sounds like a clusterfuck to me.

    Instead of bitching about what you bought you should have shopped a little more carefully. Dumbasses.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #10  
    Senior Member LogansPapa's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Surf City, USA
    Posts
    3,782
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonnabend View Post
    You CANNOT apply AMERICAN solutions to a Pacific problem, because the needs are not the same, you do not live here, and you know jack shit about what our defensive needs are.
    Funny - it was good enough to save your real estate from being over-run by the Japanese 65 years ago.
    At Coretta Scott King's funeral in early 2006, Ethel Kennedy, the widow of Robert Kennedy, leaned over to him and whispered, "The torch is being passed to you." "A chill went up my spine," Obama told an aide. (Newsweek)
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •